A World Government - Declaration of Human Rights

Понедельник, 21 ноября 2016 14:14 Автор
Picture: Marc Chagall. 1974.  Symbolism: a knight deprived of his armour standing near a banner and surrounded by peoples in peace. One single government (one head without any power) for all the peoples. This kind of government would result in a wonderful world, whose president or prime minister would have no power, but only tasks, they would be our servants, and not our masters. One single world government would prevent men from gaining power, because the existence of other governments arouses fear and increases the power of the heads of government. If wars ceased, powerful men would be no longer required: power, in fact, results from war. If the military expenses were destined for other uses, war and poverty would disappear. Picture: Marc Chagall. 1974. Symbolism: a knight deprived of his armour standing near a banner and surrounded by peoples in peace. One single government (one head without any power) for all the peoples. This kind of government would result in a wonderful world, whose president or prime minister would have no power, but only tasks, they would be our servants, and not our masters. One single world government would prevent men from gaining power, because the existence of other governments arouses fear and increases the power of the heads of government. If wars ceased, powerful men would be no longer required: power, in fact, results from war. If the military expenses were destined for other uses, war and poverty would disappear.

Now let’s consider the last statements of the “Nobody” prophet, which must not be taken for granted, but examined and discussed, in addition to the popular Declaration of Human Rights.

"Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people."

 

- Nine: a World Government

I support a single world government.

In this case, wars would no longer take place and most of the military personnel would be dismissed.

These people would be useful and offer their own contribution if they could cooperate with the other men, and poverty would disappear.

Nowadays, seventy percent of the national domestic product of all the Countries is intended for the army, while the population makes do with the remaining thirty percent.

If the army disappeared, this seventy percent would revert to all the citizens.

Poverty is not inevitable, beggars are not inevitable!

These mendicants, these Ethiopias are the result of our society.

On the one hand, we create powerful armies and on the other hand we starve thousands of people.

Armies are useless.

Soldiers professional killers and criminals, people trained to commit crimes.

And we teach men how to kill their fellows.

There are no humanity and civilization when, even today, seventy per cent of our resources is used to kill other men.

One single world government would imply a dramatic change, a true revolution. The whole  Earth would benefit from this new situation.

Moreover, one single world government would be exclusively "functional" and would work within a different context.

For example, the CEO of the postal service performs his/her tasks but has no power, as he/she does not need it.

What are the powers of the CEO of the railway company?

What are the powers of an airline manager?

They just fulfil their tasks.

One single government would be automatically functional.

Nowadays, no government can play this role, since the existence of other governments arouses fears among the population and urges it to increase the power of the relating leaders and grant them a greater support.

If there were no more wars, powerful men would be no more required, since power results from war.

As long as wars take place, power will never disappear, because they are mutually linked.

A "functional" world government would be efficient but deprived of any power, just like airlines as well as post and railway services.

Our world would be beautiful, we would ignore the name of our president or prime minister, since they would be our servants.

Conversely, now they are our masters and, in order to preserve their power, they create fear: Pakistan is going to go to war with India, therefore the Indian leaders need the maximum power.

China may attack us ...

In his autobiography, Adolf Hitler thus wrote: "If you want to preserve your power, spread fear among the people."

He is right; sometimes even crazy people may be right!

Прочитано 560 раз Последнее изменение Суббота, 20 мая 2017 11:39

Похожие материалы (по тегу)

In this article, I would like to focus on Violence and provide an insight into all its various aspects.

It goes without saying that the approach to violence takes on either an objective or a subjective connotation depending on the subjects who use violence, i.e. the oppressed or the ruling class.

Put simply, it is impossible to equate the violence of the "Settler" with the violence of the "Colonized person": the violence of the Settler against the Colonised person and the violence of the latter against the former; these "two" kinds of violence are clearly distinct.

In fact, the violence of the Rich and the violence of the Poor are not the same thing: the Poor actually fight against the root of the power and try to redeem themselves from the violence suffered, which in turn addresses the weak and urges the poor to put the blame for their failure on the lowest, forever repeating the reasons underlying their own failure and oppression.

Obviously, the violence of the Poor who wants to take the place of the rich, thus vexing those who are equally poor or even poorer, looks like the violence of the Rich, since it is based on the same feelings of envy, oppression, grudge and revenge.

This behaviour feeds the violence of the Rich and is also responsible for it.

This violence-revenge does not express the urgency to totally overcome one’s status of exploited or exploiter, as the "grudge" does not rely on "the Last will be the First, and the First will be the Last, so that there will be neither First nor Last."

However, from a logical point of view, the violence used by the "Rich" is different, because the rich can draw on countless resources to act in the name of beauty, magnanimity, mercy, pity and in harmony with the whole world, while the Servants are needy and deprived of the enlightened rationality, therefore they are generally less free and aware than the Rich or even than those who are neither rich nor poor, but released from opposing antagonisms.

Someone asked us: "Modern prophetism often talks about God, so what is God for you? And what religion do you profess? What is the meaning of this word? Are there any other Gods? If so, who are they?" 

A. as soon as you cease to be, you will become God.

However, please remember that Modern Prophetism has always regarded this entity as "The Great Light", I will tell you why later on.

Now let’s focus on the tenth right: Meritocracy.

Democracy has failed, we cannot ignore this fact; we have gone through various types of governments: aristocracy, kingdom, democratic city-states and now the whole world is exalting the idea of democracy.

However, democracy has never solved any problem, but rather has introduced new ones.

Precisely in the light of these problems, Karl Marx assumed the dictatorship of the proletariat.

I do not support this idea, since my own assumption goes far beyond democracy.

Оставить комментарий

Убедитесь, что Вы ввели всю требуемую информацию, в поля, помеченные звёздочкой (*). HTML код не допустим.

Human Rights

Prophetic Knowledge

The New Man

Современный пророк

Modern Prophets - Principles of Humanistic Logic